Corporations, high-stakes biomedical research, and research misconduct: yes they can (and sometimes do).

"CONFLICT OF INTEREST The author filed one report and one declaration as an expert on behalf of Plaintiff CrossFit, Inc. in Part IV’s final case study. Holman & Elliott, supra note 19, at 4 (Design bias ‘occurs when companies shape science by designing studies in ways that are most likely to generate results that are favorable to them …. Researchers can give a competitor’s drug in an overly high dose to make their drug look safe by comparison or in a low dose to make theirs look more effective. They can also selectively report outcomes or positive subgroups, secondary analyses, or post hoc analyses as if they were always the intended focus of the paper.’). See M. Wynia & D. Boren, Better Regulation of Industry-Sponsored Clinical Trials is Long Overdue , 37 J.L., Med & Ethics 410, 410–19 (2009); M. Angell, Industry-Sponsored Clinical Research: A Broken System , 300 JAMA 1069, 1070 (2008); M. Gaudino et al, Characteristics of Contemporary Randomized Clinical Trials and Their Association With the Trial Funding Source in Invasive Cardiovascular Interventions , JAMA Internal   Med . (June 1, 2020); R. Smith, Medical Journals are an Extension of the Marketing Arm of Pharmaceutical Companies , 2 P Lo S Med . 0364, 0365 (2005), https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020138; see also M.A. Rodwin, Conflicts of Interest, Institutional Corruption, and Pharma: An Agenda for Reform , 40 J.L., Med. & Ethics 511, 513 (2012); Sismondo, supra note 27, at 60."

"Holman & Elliott, supra note 19, at 4 (Design bias ‘occurs when companies shape science by designing studies in ways that are most likely to generate results that are favorable to them …. Researchers can give a competitor’s drug in an overly high dose to make their drug look safe by comparison or in a low dose to make theirs look more effective. They can also selectively report outcomes or positive subgroups, secondary analyses, or post hoc analyses as if they were always the intended focus of the paper.’). See M. Wynia & D. Boren, Better Regulation of Industry-Sponsored Clinical Trials is Long Overdue , 37 J.L., Med & Ethics 410, 410–19 (2009); M. Angell, Industry-Sponsored Clinical Research: A Broken System , 300 JAMA 1069, 1070 (2008); M. Gaudino et al, Characteristics of Contemporary Randomized Clinical Trials and Their Association With the Trial Funding Source in Invasive Cardiovascular Interventions , JAMA Internal   Med . (June 1, 2020); R. Smith, Medical Journals are an Extension of the Marketing Arm of Pharmaceutical Companies , 2 P Lo S Med . 0364, 0365 (2005), https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020138; see also M.A. Rodwin, Conflicts of Interest, Institutional Corruption, and Pharma: An Agenda for Reform , 40 J.L., Med. & Ethics 511, 513 (2012); Sismondo, supra note 27, at 60."